WaPo/ABC poll shows no change in race from before convention

posted at 9:21 am on September 11, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Maybe this will stop the silly post-convention panic among Republicans. When the Washington Post/ABC poll tells you there’s been no convention bump for Barack Obama, you can pretty much take that to the bank. Their latest survey shows the likely-voter split in the presidential race right where we found it a fortnight ago, with Obama up one single point over Mitt Romney — in a sample that favors the Democrats:

Last week’s Democratic National Convention helped President Obama improve his standing against Republican Mitt Romney, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, but did little to reduce voter concern about his handling of the economy.

The survey shows that the race remains close among likely voters, with Obama at 49 percent and Romney at 48 percent, virtually unchanged from a poll taken just before the conventions.

So, the second paragraph actually disproves the first. But the Post tries hard to pretend that no movement among likely voters means improvement for Obama:

But among a wider sample of all registered voters, Obama holds an apparent edge, topping Romney at 50 percent to 44 percent, and has clear advantages on important issues in the campaign when compared with his rival.

We’re less than 60 days out. Registered-voter samples don’t mean much at this stage of the election; it’s likely voters that provide predictive data from surveys. They mean even less when only 26% in the sample are Republicans. The likely voter sample improves that by a point to 27%, but still has a D+6 D/R/I at 33/27/36. The 2010 midterms had a national turnout D/R/I of 35/35/30; the 2008 election was D+7 at 39/32/29. A GOP turnout of 27% would be among the worst ever in a presidential race, if not a record. Since enthusiasm measures in other surveys, notably Gallup’s, show an enthusiasm gap favoring Republicans, I’m not inclined to buy this poll’s likely-voter split as a model for this election.

Also, the internals for Obama even among RVs are hardly cheery. His job approval hasn’t budged since before the conventions. Three weeks ago, it was 47/50, and now it’s 48/50. On the economy, he went from 43/56 to 45/53. Among independents, Obama’s job approval is 45/50 with 37% strongly disapproving. That’s probably why Romney’s beating Obama among likely independent voters by eleven points, 54/43. Obama won independents by eight in 2008 on his way to a seven point victory overall. That’s a 19-point swing among independents.

In other words, the convention had no real impact at all on the race. That’s why I say “I told you so” in my column for The Week:

Gallup conducted a survey of more than 1,000 adults over the two days following the end of the Democratic National Convention to determine which convention had the most impact. In practically every measure, the conventions produced no net change in anticipated voter behavior. After the Republican convention, 40 percent said they’d be more likely to vote for Mitt Romney, while 38 percent said less likely, with 21 percent saying the convention had no real impact at all. For Democrats, the numbers are 43/38/20, respectively. Both sets of numbers are within the 4 percent margin of error, producing a complete wash.

Conventions used to serve the purpose of cutting through the media filters so that undecided voters could see candidates for themselves and decide on their vote. But Gallup’s data on independents shows that such voters were largely unswayed by the conventions. The Democratic convention produced a 39/39 split among unaffiliated voters (half said they were more likely to vote for Obama, and half said less), while the GOP convention had a three-point positive edge, 36/33 — still well within the margin of error. Furthermore, fewer people watched the conventions at length this year, with only 55 percent of Gallup’s respondents saying they’d watched “a great deal” or “some” of the Democratic convention, and 51 percent for the GOP convention. Those are the lowest ratings from Gallup for nominating conventions in 12 years.

The speeches didn’t exactly move the needle, either — at least not those by the nominees. Only 43 percent rated Barack Obama’s speech “excellent” or “good,” just 5 points higher than Mitt Romney’s 38 percent. Both candidates scored a 16 percent combined “poor” or “terrible” rating, while roughly a quarter of respondents didn’t see either speech.

Update: The poll also asks the “better off” question, among RVs only, and only 20% think they’re better off from 4 years ago, while 32% believe they’re worse off, and 47% say no change. Among independents, that’s 19/38/43, perhaps one reason why Romney’s up eleven among independents.

Update II: Since I usually heap scorn on the WaPo/ABC series’ samples, I really should note that the Post has done a terrific job in providing easy access to the raw data breakdowns. They have each question charted, with the cross-tab info easily accessible on each via drop-down boxes. Well done.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

A circus can be fun to watch even if its forgettable a few days later. Besides, knowing how much better the line up of Republicans will be in the years to come versus the Democrats… makes me feel a little bit better about the future even among all the doom and gloom.

Maybe this will stop the silly post-convention panic among Republicans.

Meh. HA and TH bloggers post most every poll, skewed or not. And have been since last November. You folks need to get to the substance and avoid the lib-biased polls. Or, better yet, Ed, have a ‘beer summit’ with AP. That’ll certainly straighten some of the bunched panties on this site.
socalcon on September 11, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Ed’s a bit more circumspect with his take on polling than AP. I say skip the beer and just keep a tranquilizer dart handy to calm AP down.

I saw that too- made me really question her intelligence. It was almost as if she’d be O.K., with an eventual loss, just make her happy NOW with a good poll.

BettyRuth on September 11, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Ingraham wants to be a TV star and getting a regular show instead of just a substitute host for BOR. To that end, she seeks to increase her visibility by acting as a self important blow-hard. The media is happy to promote any non-liberal talking head who harps on the GOP nominee.

If Romney is up by 4% or more on election day with independents then he will win. if you look at state registrations over the past few years Dems have actually lost a little ground to Rep’s and Indy’s have actually picked up the most. I don’t see any more than 2% between D’s and R’s in turnout. The Indy vote will be the most crucial. it seems right now that obama is trailing in most polls with Indy’s by 8-12%. This would equate to a 5-6% Romney advantage.

“As someone mentioned on these threads yesterday, the only poll that counts is the final one taken on election day.”

Ah, there it is!

The comment that is always uttered by supporters of the losing side! Heard that phrase over and over and over again during poor old Bob Dole’s campaign and after McCain quit his campaign and lost his lead. Now helpless, wimpy Mitt is in the same boat.

I’ve been out of the country for a week. I left and conservatives were holding a celebration that looked like the parade scene from Ferris Bueller. I come back and they’re re-enacting Jonestown. The post DNC polls, it seems, have convinced some of us that all is lost. Dudes! Have some freaking fortitude! Let me make three points (some of which I’ve developed after talking to an erstwhile political insider who will remain nameless).

1. The polls – and the news about the polls – are made by people who want to demoralize you. When you act demoralized, you are aiding and abetting the enemy and helping to spread their poison. They lie. We know they lie. And then we proceed to believe them. Don’t be doing that.

2. Even the best polls – Rasmussen’s – overestimate Democrat turnout and are not designed to take into account anomalies like 2010. Some say, “Well, they were pretty accurate in 2010.” But WHEN were they accurate? The answer: They turned quite suddenly accurate about ten minutes before the vote when even a blind man could look up and see the tsunami about to crash down on top of their heads. You wanna know how accurate September polling is? Take a look at this from Bloomberg. Not so much, kimosabe. Look closely at that Reagan-Carter poll too.

3. Romney and Obama are polling by the minute – far, far more often and more accurately than the professional pollsters. Which one of them looks frightened to you? Me too.

Hey, this is reality. Sometimes bad guys win and good guys lose. But to these increasingly ancient eyes, it looks as if we are on the march and they are in retreat. Is it time to despair? Not today, brothers and sisters. Not today.

Comparing a court ruling not at all based on public opinion to an election outcome based on totall on public opinion isn’t exactly accurate, lol.

If people believe Obama is going to win, that’s going to be the outcome.

gumbyandpokey on September 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

That’s the problem though. It’s NOT public opinion. These are skewed samples that in no way reflect the current state of the electorate. Both the CNN and WaPo polls are absurd. As was that PPP O-I-H-O poll yesterday.

When “leaners” are included, it’s Obama 49% and Romney 47%. Leaners are those who initially indicate no preference for either candidate but express a preference for one of them in a follow-up question.

Do not get psych out by the made believe tsunami Barry is riding on with help from BJ. The bounce will be as evanescent as Barry’s promises. Focus on working to throw Barry out on Nov 6.

That WaPo poll was also done last Friday, the day after we had the Clintonpalooza in the media, and before either the bad jobs report or Obama’s mediocre speech and bad reviews had circulated among lots of voters. So it’s probably the high-water mark for Obama in this election. If he can’t get above 50% with RVs in a Democratic-skewed sample, he’s not winning.

Just posting facts. If you don’t like them, too bad. I’m based in what IS and not what SHOULD BE.

Obama is winning. Romney is losing. End of story.

gumbyandpokey on September 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Baloney. You’re concern trolling, and you know it. Just in this thread alone you’ve posted the same negative nonsense over and over again, singing the same old tired tune. You’re less concerned about facts then you are pushing the narrative that your guy Obama is inevitable or whatever.

If people believe Obama is going to win, that’s going to be the outcome.

gumbyandpokey on September 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Dewey defeats Truman!! Dewey defeats Truman!

Your concern is duly noted. I’m convinced you want Obama to win, with how much you talk about how inevitable it is, finding every piece of negativity you can to push that meme. It’s getting old.

changer1701 on September 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Gumby is a transparently disingenuous Moby. If he were NOT the rabid Obama supporter he actually IS, then we’d occasionally see him show up over the last month or two on threads about good poll showings for Mitt, or on threads that put Obama in a negative light.
But he only trolls on threads that show “good news” for Obama. Today he claimed he’s not voting for Obama.
This was probably the latest instruction he received from his handlers at Organizing for America: Claim you’re actually a Romney voter, in order to reinforce the dis-spiriting meme that Mitt supporters have given up.

If people believe Obama is going to win, that’s going to be the outcome.
gumbyandpokey on September 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Dewey defeats Truman!! Dewey defeats Truman!
Your concern is duly noted. I’m convinced you want Obama to win, with how much you talk about how inevitable it is, finding every piece of negativity you can to push that meme. It’s getting old.
changer1701 on September 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Eh, it’s the Moby season – they crawl outta the woodwork to troll. But I wish somebody had told that thing about how if you wish for something, it will come true. Coulda used it at the tables in Vegas.

Gumby is a transparently disingenuous Moby. If he were NOT the rabid Obama supporter he actually IS, then we’d occasionally see him show up over the last month or two on threads about good poll showings for Mitt, or on threads that put Obama in a negative light.
But he only trolls on threads that show “good news” for Obama.
Give it up Gumby. We know your schtick all too well.
Right Mover on September 11, 2012 at 10:47 AM

The schtick started as soon as it slithered in during the last open registrations. Like you said – “busted”.

whatcat on September 11, 2012 at 10:57 AM

A terrific find, there, whatcat. All the way back in December, our supposed GOP voter wasn’t saying anything in support of any of the primary candidates. He was already trumpeting Obama’s inevitability, as per his paid instructions.

Oh, and Tyhonsentra comes from the same troll factory with her own set of prepared talking points.

Obama lead now 3.1%. Also, his 48.7% share is highest since 3/28 & less than a pt off of his all time high of 49.5%. http://bit.ly/eLHNcQ

gumbypoked on September 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM

That average was distorted by including a +6 from a seriously flawed CNN agenda poll. The shortcoming the the CNN poll was discussed in some details yesterday (heavily overloaded with Dems (around +11), and internal showed a 14 point edge for Romney among independent when one dissected the data). Your attempt to demoralize those who are just paying casual attention will not work. One, you have already exposed yourself as an Obot. I do not think you are a paid Axelrod tool because you are so inept, who will pay you? But of course, the Barry campaign is so short of money that they may to muddle through pond scum, looking for basement clearance troll on sale for a dime. The more desperate you try, the more ineffective you are.

“A terrific find, there, whatcat. All the way back in December, our supposed GOP voter wasn’t saying anything in support of any of the primary candidates. He was already trumpeting Obama’s inevitability, as per his paid instructions.”

I was wrong about the economy recovering, but was 100% right about Obama being the luckiest politician alive. Who else would be winning with such a consistently bad economy?

And, no, I wasn’t impressed with any of the GOP primary candidates. I ended up voting for Santorum because he was the most socially conservative of the bunch, and you can look up those posts, too, if you want. I thought he might have tanked badly, but also could connect with working class voters in the midwest that Romney never will be able to.

Obama has always been an extremely lucky politician and it’s continuing now. The sex scandal got him a Senate seat. The financial collapse got him the Presidency. And it looks like the timing is perfect with the recovery happening during election year. Reagan got the perfect timing in 84, as well, and no one was going to beat him.gumbyandpokey on January 6, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Democrats and the media are going to push this meme as hard as possible. You can tell, just by the level of response and the way they are trying to will this into truth.

They even have some Republicans on the run, questioning Romney’s strategy. Cowards that they are, it’s time to put on you big boy pants.

Don’t just look at the last four years. Project those four years into the future. What’s your guess about the sustainability of the path we’re on?

Those promises Mr. Obama made? Fleeting? Too “hard”? Really? Do the next four years get easier? Can we simply carry forward what is happening now? Really? What exactly is that?

What is Mr. Obama’s plan to solve our biggest challenges? Anyone? Debt? Medicare? The giant issues with Obamacare? How about jobs? Oh, more “green” jobs? Energy independence and security? How about that “flexibility” he promised to Putin once he is reelected? A bit presumptuous and dastardly- no?

Hey idiot, do you really believe that your lies are going to demoralize anyone here from voting? It is better for your side to go and get the welfare queens to the polls rather than playing the futile game of demoralizing our side… It takes a lot of efforts to bring a welfare queen to vote whereas the producers i.e. our side does not require that much effort..

We aren’t moving much from the beginning of the summer until today. Some news moves the bar a little, the major dem blips are done by polls with zero believability in their splits.

More importantly, facts on the ground are against Obama. He is pulling out of NC, even though supposedly ROmney is only up a couple points. He is spending big in Chicago apparently to bolster fundraisnig, since he isn’t going to lose Illinois, or is soomething happening there? Indiana is out of reach for Obama and Wisconsin media would be much cheaper to support his WI efforts.

And look at the ground game – Obama rallies are not well attended and there isn’t much visibility out there outside of TV ads. Nothing like 2008. His fundrainsing haul for August was actually the best on the ground news he has had since stopping the Romney onslaught in the late spring.

I still see this like a reverse of 2008, probably a little closer due to Obama’s built in 120 votes from CA, NY, IL, and MA.

Maybe this will stop the silly post-convention panic among Republicans. When the Washington Post/ABC poll tells you there’s been no convention bump for Barack Obama, you can pretty much take that to the bank.

Or maybe this will confirm that when you are slinging BS everyone doesn’t get the memo.

Hey idiot, do you really believe that your lies are going to demoralize anyone here from voting? It is better for your side to go and get the welfare queens to the polls rather than playing the futile game of demoralizing our side… It takes a lot of efforts to bring a welfare queen to vote whereas the producers i.e. our side does not require that much effort..

mnjg on September 11, 2012 at 11:40 AM

That one is delusional…but the are a lot of hysterical ones on our side too, think the overreaction by some (on HA too) the past few days, after the touted so called ‘bump’ for O after their convention…only someone competely detached from reality coud buy into that pathetic dim propaganda courtesy of lib media….

If Romney is up by 4% or more on election day with independents then he will win. if you look at state registrations over the past few years Dems have actually lost a little ground to Rep’s and Indy’s have actually picked up the most. I don’t see any more than 2% between D’s and R’s in turnout. The Indy vote will be the most crucial. it seems right now that obama is trailing in most polls with Indy’s by 8-12%. This would equate to a 5-6% Romney advantage.

Ta111 on September 11, 2012 at 10:28 AM

I wouldn’t go that far. Indies usually make up about 30% of the electorate, so that a 10-point advantage among Indies can overcome a D+3 turnout, assuming all Dems vote for Obama and all Reps vote for Romney.

This is where voter enthusiasm comes in. Romney and Ryan need to “fire up the base” and get known Republicans, conservatives, Republican sympathizers, and anyone opposed to Obama in swing states to bring their friends to the polls, and maximize Republican turnout so that Democrat turnout is no more than 2% ahead of Republican turnout. It would also be helpful if Romney could run ads casting doubt on Obama’s leadership ability and record, possibly inciting some Democrats to either stay home or cross over for Romney.

I see no benefit in arguing about polls and bothering to attack trolls only wastes time. The trolls will remain and get a kick out of riling people up. They have to argue their nonsense just to believe it, so it’s best to leave them alone in their misery.

I suggest that EVERYONE who thinks it’s even a remote possibility that Obama will win – volunteer for Mitt. Nope, Mitt was not my first, second or even third choice. I was angry that the MSM and GOP forced him on us. That being said, I will now work my butt off to ensure that Obama loses. It becomes the most important issue to me.

F*** the polls; talk to your neighbors and coworkers, get on Facebook. Ask them who they are voting for and why. If they are voting for Obama, ask them why and persuade them why they should vote for Romney. If you just sit here on HotGas and bitch at one another about crappy polls you are part of the problem!

F*** the polls; talk to your neighbors and coworkers, get on Facebook. Ask them who they are voting for and why. If they are voting for Obama, ask them why and persuade them why they should vote for Romney. If you just sit here on HotGas and whine at one another about crappy polls then you are part of the problem!

This is a really stupid game to play because bad polls are not a good thing to have. Advise these fools not to play this game.

mnjg on September 11, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I agree. Sadly there are just enough people out there who, no matter which candidate they prefer, will vote for the percieved “winner” just so they can be on the winning side. Don’t scoff, I’ve seen it happen.

This is a really stupid game to play because bad polls are not a good thing to have. Advise these fools not to play this game.

mnjg on September 11, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I agree. Sadly there are just enough people out there who, no matter which candidate they prefer, will vote for the percieved “winner” just so they can be on the winning side. Don’t scoff, I’ve seen it happen.

Maybe this will stop the silly post-convention panic among Republicans HotAir Eeyore Pundits.

FTFY.

hoosiermama on September 11, 2012 at 9:29 AM

It was right before you fixed it. Ingraham, Kristol, Goldberg etc are Republicans. If the Democrats had a candidate as qualified as Romney they would be singing his praises 24/7. Romney could do a better job of countering Obama’s false narratives, but that said he is providing a clear choice and is winning Independents. Why are these Republican pundits joining with the liberal media in trying to depress the Republican base? Are they that stupid? Who are they trying to impress?

Ingraham, Kristol, Goldberg etc are Republicans. If the Democrats had a candidate as qualified as Romney they would be singing his praises 24/7. Romney could do a better job of countering Obama’s false narratives, but that said he is providing a clear choice and is winning Independents. Why are these Republican pundits joining with the liberal media in trying to depress the Republican base? Are they that stupid? Who are they trying to impress?

We need better pundits.

Basilsbest on September 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM

.agreed…as for our wunderbar pundits, well, some have no clue (Kristol), some are hysterical (Ingraham), some are more concerned with their own shows’ ratings and stuff (O’Reilly), some are opportunistic (Erickson) , some are well meaning but they think of themselves as some sort of conservative gurus and they feel it’s their duty to sound as equidistant as they can (Krauthammer) even if this sometimes means ignoring the reality, some want to appear as engaged and non ideological (Brit Hume), some are geeky and they over-do it at times Byron York)…your guess is as good as anyone’s….

Ingraham, Kristol, Goldberg etc are Republicans. If the Democrats had a candidate as qualified as Romney they would be singing his praises 24/7. Romney could do a better job of countering Obama’s false narratives, but that said he is providing a clear choice and is winning Independents. Why are these Republican pundits joining with the liberal media in trying to depress the Republican base? Are they that stupid? Who are they trying to impress?

We need better pundits.

Basilsbest on September 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM

.agreed…as for our wunderbar pundits, well, some have no clue (Kristol), some are hysterical (Ingraham), some are more concerned with their own shows’ ratings and stuff (O’Reilly), some are opportunistic (Erickson) , some are well meaning but they think of themselves as some sort of conservative gurus and they feel it’s their duty to sound as equidistant as they can (Krauthammer) even if this sometimes means ignoring the reality, some want to appear as engaged and non ideological (Brit Hume), some are geeky and they over-do it at times Byron York)…your guess is as good as anyone’s….

jimver on September 11, 2012 at 1:01 PM

These are great comments. This is one of the reasons Andrew Breitbart set up the Bigs – to give conservatism a voice and do what the democrats do when they all stand behind their candidate. If you watch AB’s CPAC speech he did care who would come out of the primary, just that he was supporting that candidate. Great stuff.

Do you see the democrats pull the same BS that our “conservative” pundits do? Not unless their getting fitted for the underside of the bus.

This is why we’ll always be fighting a harder fight than we need to. We need better pundits and better people working for the cause, not people who want the cause to work for them, which is what we mainly have now.

“Their latest survey shows the likely-voter split in the presidential race right where we found it a fortnight ago…”

The Post/ABC poll didn’t survey likely voters a fortnight ago, so I don’t know what you’re comparing the number to when you say he hasn’t bounced, Ed. Are you comparing likely voters today to registered voters in August? “Take that to the bank” and they’ll have your photo taped to the booth window the next time you come in.

Curious that a Fordham University study on poll accuracy places ABC/WashPost polls way down the list and places ARG polls near the top. Yet the ARG post-convention poll showing Romney at 49% and Obama at 46% got almost no press coverage last week and was totally ignored by Hotair editors.